Traffic tickets, accidents, insurance Discuss legal issues, emissions testing, illegal modifications, etc....

what's your take?

Old 02-Jul-2010, 01:55 AM
  #1  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 93
what's your take?

today while waiting for my girlfriend outside her work there Patio Umbrella flew off from the wind and hit my trunk lid now i have a scratch on my spoiler and dent/dimple of a rod in the middle. the owner came out and told me to get a quote and call him..he didn't give me the number only his name..what's your take?
jvel is offline  
Old 02-Jul-2010, 03:29 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
JDM-KID's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: in my hooptie
Posts: 410
go and talk with the guy and make sure you can work something out before hand.
JDM-KID is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 11:17 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by jvel View Post
today while waiting for my girlfriend outside her work there Patio Umbrella flew off from the wind and hit my trunk lid now i have a scratch on my spoiler and dent/dimple of a rod in the middle. the owner came out and told me to get a quote and call him..he didn't give me the number only his name..what's your take?
You have a location, right? Get an honest embellished quote, then go see him. Bring a pocket recorder to record what he says in case he tries to weasel out.
FiveO is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 11:35 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Persia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 526
how much would a pocket recorder really do, BTW isnt it tru that if you dont have there consent when recorded its voided?
Persia is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 12:07 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mississauga and Woodstock
Posts: 608
Originally Posted by Persia View Post
how much would a pocket recorder really do, BTW isnt it tru that if you dont have there consent when recorded its voided?
No, not that it's voided. But that you infringed on their privacy.

Depends what the judge/cop decides to do to you. A fair judge will dismiss the recording, but will factor it in their ruling.
HabaneroRed06Si is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 04:18 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by Persia View Post
how much would a pocket recorder really do, BTW isnt it tru that if you dont have there consent when recorded its voided?
Canada is a one-party consent state. Only one party has to be aware of and consent to the recording. You do not have to inform the other party that you are recording them. Recordings are admissible as evidence in civil suits. It puts a quick end to he-said/she-said.
FiveO is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 04:23 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by HabaneroRed06Si View Post
No, not that it's voided. But that you infringed on their privacy.

Depends what the judge/cop decides to do to you. A fair judge will dismiss the recording, but will factor it in their ruling.
If you are actually part of the conversation you are taping, you haven't infringed on anyone's privacy by taping it.

If you are recording others having a conversation when you yourself are not actually part of the group having that conversation, THEN you are infringing on another's privacy.
FiveO is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 05:01 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mississauga and Woodstock
Posts: 608
Originally Posted by FiveO View Post
If you are actually part of the conversation you are taping, you haven't infringed on anyone's privacy by taping it.

If you are recording others having a conversation when you yourself are not actually part of the group having that conversation, THEN you are infringing on another's privacy.
OHHHHH I wouldn't put my money on that. I haven't bothered to read on the law, but have heard from legal representatives that it can get you into trouble for recording someone regardless if you are apart of that conversation. You have to explain to the person that are being recorded.
HabaneroRed06Si is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 05:02 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mississauga and Woodstock
Posts: 608
Originally Posted by FiveO View Post
Canada is a one-party consent state. Only one party has to be aware of and consent to the recording. You do not have to inform the other party that you are recording them. Recordings are admissible as evidence in civil suits. It puts a quick end to he-said/she-said.
This is wrong. Example Rogers, CIBC any call centre that records conversations notify's you that the call is being recorded.
HabaneroRed06Si is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 06:02 PM
  #10  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 93
i went to go get a quote and i showed it to him. he said he'll call the place i went and i'm like call them cos he's asking if they can do the price a little better. i'm not worried he owns cora's breakfast and he said he'll give me a call and if they can't lower the price he'll pay me.. so i'm hoping he'll keep his words.
jvel is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 06:05 PM
  #11  
F8i
Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
 
F8i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Kincardine
Posts: 769
Maybe that's because they want to avoid lawsuits at any cost? Maybe so they don't get sued for herassment(sp?)? Maybe so you won't feel like they're voiding your trust? Maybe because they're a company, and that might be privacy rights.

I don't have the answers, but when it comes to the law, I believe what FiveO Says. Not saying either a 100% right or wrong, but I would side with FiveO.
F8i is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 07:07 PM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by HabaneroRed06Si View Post
OHHHHH I wouldn't put my money on that. I haven't bothered to read on the law, but have heard from legal representatives that it can get you into trouble for recording someone regardless if you are apart of that conversation. You have to explain to the person that are being recorded.
Maybe you should read the law.

Rogers and such companies informing you that they are recording the conversation is done for courtesy reasons. In the current age of business transactions over telephone, they also do it to explicitly discourage you from calling them back later with claims that their agents lied to you to complete a business transaction.

It's also done to ensure the integrity of business dealings arranged over the phone. You can't easily come back at them later on and claim they lied to you when they can produce a tape proving otherwise.

With regard to Canadian law, it prohibits the "interception" of private communications, but it also lays out specific exceptions.
Section 182(2) of the Criminal Code sets out a number of exceptions to the general rule that it is unlawful to intercept private communications. The most important exception for the purposes of this article is the exception that applies when one of the parties to the communication consents to interception i.e. s. 184(2)(a):

184(2) Subsection (1) [i.e. the section prohibiting interception of private communications] does not apply to:
(a) a person who has the consent to intercept, express or implied, of the originator of the private communication or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it;
(b) [an interception done under the authorization of a warrant];
(c) [an interception by a telecommunications company providing services to the public who intercepts for the purpose of monitoring the quality of service];
(d) [an interception by a government agent monitoring the airwaves for illegal use of particular radio frequencies]; or
(e) [an interception by persons managing the quality of certain computer services to ensure that those computer services are not used illegally].

Thus any intended recipient of a communication is entitled to record it.

Section 184.1 of the Criminal Code provides a further exception to the rule against interception and permits undercover police officers to wear recording devices that transmit signals to a backup team who can move in to help the undercover officer if it appears that he or she may be in danger. In such cases the purpose of the recording device is not to record evidence but to protect officer safety. Recordings obtained in such circumstances can only be used as evidence in court in limited circumstances; see s. 184.1.

Examples from case law further assert that recordings can be made secretly without the knowledge or consent of all participants in a conversation.
In R. v. Strano (2001), 80 C.R.R. (2d) 93 (Ont. H.C.J.) a contractor surreptitiously recorded a conversation he had with the accused using a device disguised as a pen. The recording was originally made for the contractors own purposes, but later provided to the police who used it in a criminal prosecution for the offences of accepting secret commissions and breach of trust. Lane J. considered the relevant Criminal Code provisions and the Charter, but held that neither applied to the recordings.

In La Compagnie D’Assurance Standard Life v. Renald Rouleau, [1995] R.J.Q. 1407 at para. 19 (S.C.) the Quebec Superior Court held that an employer surreptitiously recording telephone conversations with an ex-employee was not a violation of s. 184 of the Criminal Code.
FiveO is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 07:45 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
D.T.P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,637
Its a business, I doubt the owner would try to scam you. I'm sure the owner understands that if he scams you, you may just do some property damage out of spite. So easier to just pay up and be done with it.
D.T.P is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 10:29 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by scrid3r View Post
Its a business, I doubt the owner would try to scam you. I'm sure the owner understands that if he scams you, you may just do some property damage out of spite. So easier to just pay up and be done with it.
That's the hope, but there are business owners and there are business owners. In the end they're just people, and people have a way of coming in different flavours of integrity.
FiveO is offline  
Old 04-Jul-2010, 11:07 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
tr1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 143
Come on ,you seriously can handle the famous early bird breakfast franchise, coras is pretty big in and out the city , a stupid paintjob lawsuit to be out on press just can ruin the rep. Plus they need write off for taxes anyways so that's one way. You'll be safe. Unless it happpened on a no name chinese take out place then gl lol.
tr1p is offline  
Old 08-Jul-2010, 10:37 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Hugehumongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Shilo Manitoba
Posts: 209
yeah i currently work for a call center. first i do when i person picks up is give them my name, where im calling from and the buisness im calling for. then i have to tell them "the will will be recorded for quality assurance". you can get some deep trouble for not saying those basic things. just my 2 cents
Hugehumongo is offline  
Old 08-Jul-2010, 11:18 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
jdm ek4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 730
I just go to say that FiveO is one of our best members we have on this site.
jdm ek4 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
imported_Slvr-Bullet
Chit-Chat
10
11-Nov-2002 08:42 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: what's your take?


Contact Us - Sitemap - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.